| |||||||||||||
A new Linux/Windows TCO studyA new Linux/Windows TCO studyPosted Feb 13, 2006 20:55 UTC (Mon) by alspnost (guest, #2763)In reply to: A new Linux/Windows TCO study by wartstew Parent article: A new Linux/Windows TCO study Yep - I can second this as well, now that I work in a mainly Windows support environment. I've fixed a few Linux servers quickly and easily, and they go on to run trouble-free for another 2 years or so, to the point that people forget they are on the network at all! With Windows servers, when they goes wrong, it's a nightmare. Endless meaningless errors in the event logs, fumbling about trying to diagnose them in the Micro$oft knowledge base, and constant maintenance requirements. Windows Server 2003 looks great on the outside, and is fairly solid overall, but it's still a horrible mess underneath, with log files and TMP files just dumped all over the damn place, and the achilles heel of being a monolithic system, wherein one screw-up can bring down the entire edifice. As for Windows PCs, how would we even repair them without our trusty Linux live CDs?!
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||||